Hello,
After reading some of the posts on Ubi's F1 Simulator and playing it
myself, I wonder if some of the complaints about the braking,
acceleration, etc. are a result of lack of computing power. I recall
a similar incident when I looked at the IndyCar II demo, where I had
all kinds of control and acceleration problems, but decent frame rate,
when running it (low or high res) on a 486DX4-100. I was about to
blame the software until I ran IndyCar II on a Pentium 133, where it
ran fine, both frame rate and control wise.
In other words, maybe the lack of computer resources may not have
shown itself in a lack of frame rate, but instead shown itself in a
lack of modeling?
In my case, I'm finding the same problems I had in IndyCar II in Ubi's
F1 for handling and braking. The frame rate is there, except for the
occasional slide show with a multiple car pileup. I would have blamed
the software until I read other reports where people with Pentium II's
and Pentium 200's running OK. Note my machine is a Pentium 133 Mhz
with a 3Dfx board. Maybe I need to make a CPU run to the local
computer shop...
As far as the graphics are concerned, there was some slight problems
with the people in the stands and some texture blockiness, but
otherwise it made my eyes pop out of their sockets...
I feel this this software has enough promise to make me say "IndyCar
II with 3Dfx or Direct3D support? Who cares!" Not that I have a
grudge against Papyrus, but perhaps *now* they can maybe, just maybe,
allocate some well spent man hours to make a 3Dfx version of IndyCar
II or Nascar II (or for God's sake, at least SODA!). BTW, can't wait
for Terminal Reality / MS's CART demo. I wonder where I'll be
spending my *** dollars on...
John